Discussing the most relevant "sequels" or "reminders" of 9/11. The so-called "War On Terror" is a global scam finalized to manipulate this world's population with crass fear-mongering tactics designed to scare you shitless.

Good Lord! I feel sorry for these people, they don't know what they're doing and don't know where they're heading. I wouldn't want to be them when their time comes, and don't wish upon them what they have coming. I do despair at the shortsightedness of some, though. It seems to be the cause of so much wrong in the world.

Thanks to 'resolution' for the summary, I wouldn't have seen the video otherwise.

State Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr. couldn't have been clearer and more forceful than he was Monday in describing his complaints against proposed legislation that would place significant new restrictions on the public's ability to obtain law-enforcement records such as 911 tapes and crime-scene photographs.

The legislation "is not only counterproductive — it is destructive," the Senate Democratic leader said of a measure based on the recommendations of the post-Sandy Hook Task Force on Victim Privacy and the Public's Right to Know. "If enacted," he warned, "this would result in an unprecedented denial of previously available information."

Mr. Williams and a small but growing number of lawmakers have become disenchanted with the crushing burden that laws like this are placing on the free flow of public information — a commodity owned by the people and not by the government agencies in question. They spoke their minds at two legislative hearings on the anti-freedom-of-information bills Monday.

Good for them, up to a point. It's just too bad that the Senate president and like-minded legislators didn't experience their epiphanies last year, before the final days of the 2013 session, when the seeds of today's freedom-of-information crisis were sown.

Passed Without A Public Hearing

Maybe then the General Assembly wouldn't have gone overboard and passed — without public hearing — the ill-considered Public Act 13-311, a statute that allows law-enforcement agencies to lock away from public view homicide photographs and other crime-scene information.

Last June, Mr. Williams, one of the legislature's most powerful members, cast his vote for this draconian and overreaching bill, which passed overwhelmingly in a swell of sympathy for parents of children murdered in the 2012 Newtown shootings. Two brave lawmakers dissented because they understood that hiding information isn't what an open society does. "Suppression of horrific conduct, as this bill dictates, invites history to repeat itself," said state Sen. Ed Meyer, one of the two who voted against it.

This year, Mr. Williams must lead an effort to repeal Public Act 13-311 — and kill the legislation encapsulating the privacy task force recommendations.

A return to the status quo ante — to the time before the Sandy Hook massacre caused victims' families to clamor for unwise exemptions from Connecticut's respected freedom-of-information laws and traditions — would be best.

Where's The Evidence Of Harm?

Task force recommendations were heard by the Judiciary Committee and the Government Administration and Elections Committee on Monday. They represent an improvement, but not by much, over the legal landscape shaped by the passage of Public Act 13-311.

The task force bill, for example, would permit members of the public to view photographs and other images of homicide victims and listen to homicide-related 911 calls.

But the information could not be copied unless an appeal was made through a time-consuming process in which the burden is on the citizen to make the case for disclosure. Historically, the burden has been on the government agency to prove why the public record should not be disclosed.

The task force bill also makes unauthorized copying of a public document (with a cellphone camera, for example) a crime. Where are we, Pyongyang?

Much of what the Newtown parents who want the restrictions (not all of them do) have asked for is understandable, considering their loss. But is it necessary?

Dan Klau, in his testimony for the Connecticut Bar Association, had a persuasive answer.

"Not a single person who appeared before the task force," Mr. Klau said, "presented testimony or evidence of a past disclosure of a government document, pursuant to an FOIA request, that actually resulted in the widespread dissemination … of graphic crime scene photographs, embarrassing or humiliating 911 calls, or documents identifying witnesses that put the witness at risk of harm or caused embarrassment or humiliation.

He concluded "The legislature should not curtail the public's cherished right to access to government documents based on conjecture and speculation."

Clearly, Connecticut has been on the wrong track the past year. Defeat of the task force legislation and repeal of Public Act 13-311 are in order.

The legislators ended up changing their mind by the end of the current 2014 session and decided that the release of 911 tapes was enough. There are no plans to revisit the issue next session. We can therefore expect many more gun-related homicides and false flags in the future.

This one was botched pretty bad. Yet, I have friends who I thought were pretty bright and yet... still bought Robby Parker's fake crying act... ugh...."oh he's just in shock, I've seen that before..."

For me, just the fake acting alone was enough to expose the hoax, let alone;

No surveillance video at all
No tears from anyone
No blood anywhere and when Officer Vance was asked "Who cleaned up the blood?", his answer was "What blood"?
No Blood in the Lanza house
No injured, except one lady who drove herself to the hospital an hour or so after the pretend shooting
No death certificates
No open caskets
No rifle or shotgun rounds at the scene which contradicts the coroner's claim that "All wounds were shotgun wounds"
No rifle or shotguns found in the classroom
No evidence that Adam Lanza has even been alive for the last 2 years
No neighbors have ever seen the inside of the Lanza house
No real reporting
No footage of any mass evacuation from the school
No real evidence of any kind that any child died that day
No Motive
No evidence that Nancy or Adam joined any gun clubs or attended any shooting ranges
No evidence that Nancy or Adam had licenses to own guns
No family pictures﻿

I was just about to post the same article, Simon! It was passed to me by a new aspiring CluesForum user (Tal Shiar?) through Videre.

I must wonder: if this is the same guy that was "allowed" (shall we say?) to crash a ("LIVE"?) Super Bowl media event with 9/11 talk, could he have been set up to take the fall for people who show basic curiosity? Or is he "legit" and he is now going to be financially crushed in the gears as punishment? Either way, it's obvious why this article exists: to create fear of questioning things for one demographic and alertness/attraction to questioning things for another.

Unfortunately, for a lot of people, this article will turn their stomach — and not in the way it might make us belly laugh. I find that especially young people these days are extremely concerned about — well, perhaps I shouldn't give the perps an easy way to access young persons' psychology but — just how to reconcile their own "truther" beliefs with their brainwashing they are struggling to digest. Suffice to say, unfortunately, this kind of article may be effective for them at making them divided between those afraid to question things and those who perpetually try to change the legal system with protests and petitions.

And that is a pretty pathetic thing, since young people are famously always wanting to "change the world" and uphold "radical" beliefs. Their radicalism is being channeled by the media in ways that dodge the numerous vague threats from the media — rather than boldly standing against it and inventing better.

On the plus side, it's looking grim for the old paradigm that walking down the street with a sign is enough participation to change the system. It obviously is not.

It’s been three years since we last embraced our precious little boy, Noah. At six-years-old, he was the youngest child murdered at the Sandy Hook Elementary School. While our family may have managed to live through this tragedy, the passage of time has nowhere near dimmed the vivid memory of that day nor made it any less difficult for us to cope with the pain and anguish of losing our only son.

The heartache of burying a child is a sorrow we would not wish upon anyone. Yet to our horror, we have found that there are some in this society who lack empathy for the suffering of others. Among them are the conspiracy theorists that deny our tragedy was real. They seek us out and accuse us of being government agents who are faking our grief and lying about our loss.

Each new high-profile act of violence inspires more conspiracies and creates new victims of harassment and defamation, whether it be the Boston Bombing, the terrorist attacks in Paris or the most recent massacre in San Bernardino, CA. In that instance, a lawyer for the family of the shooters said Sandy Hook did not happen. And don't get us started on Donald Trump and his rantings on the Alex Jones radio show. It is obvious by the demographics of the show's audience that Trump appeared as a guest looking for votes from the conspiracy crowd.

Although many of these tormentors persecute us behind anonymous online identities, some do so openly and even proffer their professional credentials in an attempt to lend credence to their allegations. In this piece we want to focus on someone who is chief among the conspiracy theorists -- Florida Atlantic University Professor James Tracy.

A plethora of conspiracies arose after Sandy Hook, but none received as much mainstream publicity as Tracy, who suggested that the shooting never occurred and the Obama administration had staged the “event” to prepare the country for strict gun control measures.

More than 800 news organizations covered the story of his denial. As a result, this professor achieved fame among the morbid and deranged precisely because his theories were attached to his academic credentials and his affiliation with FAU. Tracy has enjoyed tremendous success from this exposure and has since leveraged it into a popular Internet blog and radio program. Worse yet, it has elevated his status and fame among the degenerates that revel in the pleasure of sadistically torturing victims’ families.

It cannot be denied that Tracy has carved out a significant presence in the same Sandy Hook “hoax” conspiracy movement that has inspired a wave of harassment, intimidation and criminal activity against our family and others.

In fact, Tracy is among those who have personally sought to cause our family pain and anguish by publicly demonizing our attempts to keep cherished photos of our slain son from falling into the hands of conspiracy theorists.

Tracy even sent us a certified letter demanding proof that Noah once lived, that we were his parents, and that we were the rightful owner of his photographic image. We found this so outrageous and unsettling that we filed a police report for harassment. Once Tracy realized we would not respond, he subjected us to ridicule and contempt on his blog, boasting to his readers that the “unfulfilled request” was “noteworthy” because we had used copyright claims to “thwart continued research of the Sandy Hook massacre event.”

His blog post was echoed dozens of times on conspiracy websites, including one maintained by Tracy’s colleague and frequent collaborator James Fetzer, a Holocaust denier who expounded upon Tracy’s article by stating that our refusal to respond to this obscene ultimatum “implies that Noah did not die at Sandy Hook and confirms that Lenny is a fraud.”

Although FAU issued a “reprimand” to Tracy for the irresponsible and insensitive comments he made in late 2012, he has shown no remorse and continues to conceive conspiracy theories out of each new mass shooting. While Tracy may now limit mention of his association with FAU, it has not gone unnoticed by the press.

After Tracy spouted yet another ridiculous theory concerning the Washington Navy Yard shooting of 2013, Education Editor Eric Owens of the Daily Caller cited the professor in declaring that “Florida Atlantic University remains and apparently always will be the worst place in America to go to college.”

When do the interests of the college and its students take precedence over the tenure of a professor who has clearly proven himself in violation of the university’s own policy? The FAU Academic Affairs Faculty Handbook clearly states that “A faculty member's activities which fall outside the scope of employment shall constitute misconduct only if such activities adversely affect the legitimate interests of the University,”

In an April 2013 Huffington Post article, Heather Coltman, interim dean of the College of Arts and Letters, clearly states that “Tracy's earlier posting has resulted in a number of negative consequences for FAU, including a large number of parents who withdrew their children's applications to FAU, a student whose parent asked that she be withdrawn from his class and a donor who withdrew his support to the Department of History.”

It matters not if Tracy simply refrains from mentioning FAU when defaming murdered Americans and their families. There is ample evidence to demonstrate that his extracurricular misconduct has already adversely affected FAU’s reputation and will continue doing so as long as he continues down this path.

It is time FAU reassess if their priorities properly reflect the best interests of their staff, donors and — most importantly — their students. “The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech, but the Constitution does not guarantee that you can't be fired for expressing your beliefs as part of your job,” says the National Education Association. “The courts could decide either way and the burden of proof shifts sharply to the professor.”

FAU has a civic responsibility to ensure that it does not contribute to the ongoing persecution of the countless Americans who’ve lost their loved ones to high-profile acts of violence.

Veronique and Lenny Pozner are the parents of Noah Pozner, one of the 20 children killed in the December 14. 2012, Sandy Hook massacre. Lenny founded the HONR Network, aimed at combating conspiracy theorists on mass shootings.

These Sandy Hookers are the worst sort of vermin in the Department of Hoaxland Services. It's clear they are simply trying to put the fear in any other professors out there who may consider speaking up on this.

If media fakery were to become an acceptable topic of conversation at universities then their house of cards would come down faster than Bill Clinton's pants at a sorority house.

Also, this clown obviously has no clue what the First Amendment protects. A public university cannot fire a professor for unpopular speech. Period. If his story is real, and he is retaliated against for his speech, then I hope he sues them for a lot of money in federal court. It's possible that he is a plant just for the purpose of creating an example for others though.

I find it hilarious that she referenced so many other hoaxes when trying to bolster her ridiculous point about "conspiracy theories".

It looks to me like the perps are getting scared of the increasing awareness of their scams. We can hope.

I would absolutely love to cross examine any one of these Sandy Hoax "parents". That would be a true pleasure.

Anybody wanna guess how much money Newtown has received in donations,gov't grants,etc?
Dec 2013-$27 milllion, Various Sandy Hook national charities.
Oct 2013-$50 million, State of Conn. to demolish and rebuild Sandy Hook.
Nov 2013-$15 million, General Electric donation to Newtown.
May 2013-$1.3 million, US Dept of Education to Newtown for support and recovery efforts.
Jan 2014-$1.9 million, US Dept of Education to Newtown for MORE support and recovery efforts.
Compensation Fund for families of deceased victims- $7,310,000.
Obama Administration's $2.5 million gift of taxpayer money to local police agencies in and around Newtown
This is a short list..

There are also new legal precedents being set, again, with this FF, by having the vicsim's mother's estate (homeowner's policy) paying out $1.5 million to the families of the dead. Nancy Lanza did not secure her weapon that her 26 year son removed from her house and committed murder with. First of all did they ever prove that the gun was not properly secured? Is it that he was her son that makes her responsible for these murders or would it be anybody in your home (say a burglar) that took your unsecured gun and committed these murders? If it's because it was her son, at what age are parents now responsible for the actions of their kids as far as forking over money?

Apparently Ryan Lanza is not interested in anything from his mother's estate. He let them take and bulldoze the house without any resistance. It's funny, the media just does away with sims and the sheeple don't bat an eye.

I thought the time frame to file a lawsuit against the school/city had run out. Apparently not. This will end up with huge security changes being made nationwide by school districts to insure against such lawsuits.

"Meanwhile, the families of two young victims have filed a lawsuit against Newtown and the school board. The 66-page wrongful death lawsuit alleges that security measures at the school were not adequate."

The new and improved Sandy Hook school is ready for the little tikes to move into. Parents need not worry - the place is like a fortress/prison and you will be told when and if you can see your little darlings. Of course the officials in Newtown hope this sets the standard, nationwide, for schools of the future.

Lenny Pozner used to believe in conspiracy theories. Until his son’s death became one.

"But by the spring of 2014, as he watched the hoaxer movement bloom, Pozner decided to try fighting back. He released Noah’s death certificate, to convince those who believed he had not been killed, and his report card — “Noah is a bright, inquisitive boy” — for those who believed he had never lived at all. One Friday night, a year and a half after the shooting, he joined a Facebook group called Sandy Hook Hoax, one of the more prominent hoaxer meeting grounds. (Its logo features a ghostly child holding an index finger to her mouth.) Pozner told the group he was there to answer questions, and he expressed empathy for their mind-set. “I used to argue with people about 9/11 being an inside job,” he wrote. Some members of the group asked earnest questions about inconsistencies in the official account. Others simply lobbed bombs. “Fuck you Lenny fuck off and fuck your fake family, you piec [sic] of shit,” one woman wrote. Pozner chatted for more than four hours, but his patience wore thin as the questions grew more absurd:"

Nice brainwashing article you found, OpticalIllusion. What do you make of it?

It seems to me to be a blatant attempt at interbreeding "Wall of Tears" sympathy with a distaste for asking questions. If it works, as their studies decide, I'd imagine we could expect to see more of this kind of article in the future.

Psychopaths know that it's extraordinarily difficult for people to distinguish them from empathic or average people. However, this strategy has a weakness, which reveals the strength of a new paradigm that embraces critical thinking: as time goes on, psychopaths using articles like this to blatantly point out their own ability to hide in the public will create a greater suspicion in the public. It can and will lead only to more scrutiny of each other for psychopathic personalities. And since that chimes with our goals to help people wake up and think for themselves, it will work against them and for us.